An Interesting Sitch

[TravelinMan]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

If it makes you feel any better, Chuck, you're short too.

Hey JR, being short isn't all that bad....you can get into places at kid's prices.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Snake~eyes
Never said there was anything wrong with disagreeing, just yelling at refs when you do disagree.

Once again -- and for the last time -- here's your actual original quote:

It is unacceptable to pulicly disagree with a fellow official. Anyone who does that is a total ******* (emphasis mine)

This was my only point. Disagreeing does not make one an a-hole. I think we agree on that. I just thought you could've said it a little more calmly. Now I really am done.

[SMEngmann]

I have a slightly different opinion here. In a game with a lack of sportsmanship and class like there was in this game, tempers can get the best of everyone, it obviously angered coach A. I think this could be one of those rare times when the official brings both coaches together to try to reach some sort of an understanding on how to finish the last few minutes of the game with sportsmanship and class. If it is apparant that neither can, then it would be the perfect time to get the coaches to agree to shorten the length of the last period and end the game right there to end any chance of someone losing their temper and doing something stupid. The outcome's already decided and both coaches have made their points, if the game's gonna become an ego war, just end it and move on.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

Disagreeing does not make one an a-hole. I think we agree on that.

[/B][/QUOTE]Well, I don't want to be an a-hole, so I'll disagree. Does that mean that agreeing makes one an a-hole?

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by SMEngmann
I have a slightly different opinion here. In a game with a lack of sportsmanship and class like there was in this game, tempers can get the best of everyone, it obviously angered coach A. I think this could be one of those rare times when the official brings both coaches together to try to reach some sort of an understanding on how to finish the last few minutes of the game with sportsmanship and class. If it is apparant that neither can, then it would be the perfect time to get the coaches to agree to shorten the length of the last period and end the game right there to end any chance of someone losing their temper and doing something stupid. The outcome's already decided and both coaches have made their points, if the game's gonna become an ego war, just end it and move on.

Disagree.

It's not our job to tell anybody how to coach their team. Our job is to just neutrally call what happens, without passing our personal moral judgement on anybody.

[SMEngmann]

[/B][/QUOTE]Disagree.

It's not our job to tell anybody how to coach their team. Our job is to just neutrally call what happens, without passing our personal moral judgement on anybody. [/B][/QUOTE]

I agree with you there, but there are times when minor irritants can flare up, and I think this is a chance to nip a possible incident in the bud. Both teams clearly don't want to play under the conditions that developed, so if neither coach wants to change the conditions, ballgame. No need to finish the game under such animousity, especially with the outcome already decided.

[rainmaker]

Originally posted by ChuckElias

Jeez, show a softer side of yourself for one day, and it's like blood in the water. Forget I ever mentioned any of it. In fact, you know what? It is unforgiveable. The guy should never be allowed to coach again! In fact, he should never be allowed around children again! And another thing. Officials who disagree with other officials are A-holes!! Yeah, in fact, all officials are A-holes! That's right, officials shouldn't be allowed around children either!!

Everybody happy now? Forget it. I'll leave the "toning down" lectures to Juulie.

Im not in a particularly "toning down" mood today, so you guys can just stew in your own juices. So there.

[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee
Disagree.

It's not our job to tell anybody how to coach their team. Our job is to just neutrally call what happens, without passing our personal moral judgement on anybody.

I agree.

[Jurassic Referee]

Originally posted by SMEngmann

Disagree.

It's not our job to tell anybody how to coach their team. Our job is to just neutrally call what happens, without passing our personal moral judgement on anybody. [/B][/QUOTE]

I agree with you there, but there are times when minor irritants can flare up, and I think this is a chance to nip a possible incident in the bud. Both teams clearly don't want to play under the conditions that developed, so if neither coach wants to change the conditions, ballgame. No need to finish the game under such animousity, especially with the outcome already decided. [/B][/QUOTE]I think that the actual response made by one of the original refs was pretty much dead on. He just didn't really have a rule available to him that he can use, unless he wants to get into the "travesty of the game" thingy- so there's not much he could do. There's no rule prohibiting a team from pressing, and there also isn't a rule that says that you can't commit a deliberate turnover. You certainly can get the coaches together and tell them that you don't want them trash-talking each other, and you also can nail them real quick if they try to do so. Other than that, I think that your best course of action is just to make sure that you call what you have to, keep a lid on everything and get the game over asap. Then write it up, and let the league worry about it. It should be their problem, not your's, anyway. Jmo.

[TravelinMan]

Originally posted by rainmaker

Im not in a particularly "toning down" mood today, so you guys can just stew in your own juices. So there.

Chuck, even Juulie won't save your butt. What does that tell you?

[Dan_ref]

Uhmmm...what's the question?

[SMEngmann]

Originally posted by Jurassic Referee

Disagree.

It's not our job to tell anybody how to coach their team. Our job is to just neutrally call what happens, without passing our personal moral judgement on anybody.

I agree with you there, but there are times when minor irritants can flare up, and I think this is a chance to nip a possible incident in the bud. Both teams clearly don't want to play under the conditions that developed, so if neither coach wants to change the conditions, ballgame. No need to finish the game under such animousity, especially with the outcome already decided. [/B][/QUOTE]I think that the actual response made by one of the original refs was pretty much dead on. He just didn't really have a rule available to him that he can use, unless he wants to get into the "travesty of the game" thingy- so there's not much he could do. There's no rule prohibiting a team from pressing, and there also isn't a rule that says that you can't commit a deliberate turnover. You certainly can get the coaches together and tell them that you don't want them trash-talking each other, and you also can nail them real quick if they try to do so. Other than that, I think that your best course of action is just to make sure that you call what you have to, keep a lid on everything and get the game over asap. Then write it up, and let the league worry about it. It should be their problem, not your's, anyway. Jmo. [/B][/QUOTE]

Jurassic, I basically agree with you on most of the points, and obviously I wasn't there. As an official it's not my business how anyone wants to coach their team, but it is my business to manage the game. In this case a team has basically quit playing by giving up the ball to protest the other team's press, which, thus, prevents the other team from working on its presses. Nothing can be gained by either team in this situation, and the game could further degenerate easily with a hard foul here or there or a confrontation between the coaches. I'm not suggesting forfeiting the game, but rather conferring with the coaches and discussing shortening the length of the quarter as per Rule 5.5.3. At least doing so would address a situation which I feel shouldn't be ignored, but again jmo.